Rspca Australia

[Aidan3]

http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/4603513

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0t32b7QK5U

A quote from an interview with Dr McGreevy “We persistently frustrate our canine companions by ignoring what they truly value – fun, exercise and training.”

... seems fairly pro-training to me! And as a veterinary behaviourist, I would expect so too.

[Jed]

Oh dear, wonder if this will be more of "all companion animals should be free"?

Perhaps "companion animals" now includes horses. I must agree that horses would prefer not to be trained, but once you explain to them that the alternative is racing at the greyhound track (IN a greyhound) or in a steel stable on a supermarket shelf, they do seem to undestand that occasionally being ridden is preferable!!

And of course, with the usual suspects in attendance, you could only think the worst, Erny.

Moving out seems good to me. Must be the air here, that we breed more ratbags per square mm than "they" do

shortstep

What is it going to take for all people in Australia to wake up and see what is happening?

Oh, we're awake, but unfortunatley, governments know little of the subject and are easily swayed. They are also likely to do trade offs, as in "we'll give you doggies' tails, if you leave the lambs' tails alone". Oh dearie me yes!

Edited September 27, 2010 by Jed

[Are You Serious Jo]

Despite the fact there is ample evidence via peer reviewed papers that animals choose to work for food (contrafreeloading) and there have been significant benefits of training I some how don't think those papers will be mentioned. McGreevy is the new Don Burke, how did this guy get so much power?

[newfsie]

Soon there will be a marriage between PETA and the RSPCA

[asal]

Soon there will be a marriage between PETA and the RSPCA

to quote a friend who is a member of the rspca.." I received a letter asking me to get all my friends to join up. as Peta is infiltrating the rspca with the intend of taking it over."

that was about 9 years ago. seemed the rspca at that time was viewing it as a hostile takeover

what the odds its been or being achieved now?

Edited September 27, 2010 by asal

[Pippa]

That's so.

Edited September 27, 2010 by Pippa

[Erny]

A quote from an interview with Dr McGreevy “We persistently frustrate our canine companions by ignoring what they truly value – fun, exercise and training.”

... seems fairly pro-training to me! And as a veterinary behaviourist, I would expect so too.

Aidan - I hope you're right with the positive assured attitude that seems to come from your post.

Me? I think the opposite, I'm afraid. Why would RSPCA put on a seminar about this sort of thing if not to suggest some change is required? It is not as though "training your dog" is a new concept and it is not as though this is not already widely publicised and encouraged. I mean, no-one who owns or has owned a dog has ever (to my knowledge) said "train a dog? ..... ooooh - never heard of anything such as that. That can't be good for dogs, can it?" Yes. Cynicism. And coming from me of all people! . I will try to find out a bit more of what might be expected from the seminar but of course they'll want to retain an air of mystery for interest and attendance sake (fair enough) so not sure I'll be able to get clear answers to what I seek.

My bet is that it is going to eventuate into controls of HOW we train our dogs. Just like the controls on WHAT we are allowed to train our dogs with (RSPCA's preferences) have already spread their relentless tentacles. And of course, take into account the item on their "priority wish list" was to have controls on dog training and trainers. This "seminar" I can't help thinking will just be the beginning.

I do not trust the agenda's of executive people in the said organisation, nor the people who join with their ranks. I hope they can prove that my suspicions are wrong, although with history as it is (even right up to the current) they'll have their work cut out for them and it will take a while for them to do so and for me to ever trust in them again.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Erny

[Erny]

Mind you ..... my scepticism and distrust of the agendas of this organisation aside, on more than one level I think the seminar could be an interesting and worthwhile one to attend. I actually wish it were happening in Melbourne where I could go.

[aussielover]

Paul McGreevy is one is my lecturers and while I disagree with some of his views, he is actually very pro-training, he is really into clicker training and organised for us to have demos by the mounted police, guide dogs, assistance dogs, police dogs and canine "actors". He is also pretty into dressage and other horse sports, so i doubt he'd be against animal training completely.

Have they not considered that most working dogs actually want to work?

The selection process for most jobs like customs, police, guide dogs even sheep dogs is pretty tough with some having upto 50% failure rates. If a dog doesn't want to work, it doesn't make it.

Sheep dogs don't even work for a reward in most cases apart from satifying their natural instinct. Qualified guide dogs and assistance dogs don't generally work for a reward apart form occaisonal verbal praise.

[oakway]

Stay right where you are, Staranais. Don't come here. You'll only probably find that when you get here, we've all left for your place.

;)

[CJay]

As its been said working dogs want to work. Horses are the same, try getting 800kg of race horse to go to work if it doesn't want to...you won't, i've tried, failed sent him to a dressage home and he's now a fat, happy very spoilt champ, the bugger gets around in rugs that are worth more than my car.

I personally think the RSPCA is getting further and further out of line, it seems that they are now more interested in making lives difficult and becoming nazis than doing what they advocate, they constiantly complain and campain for money, yet they seem to be spending it on unjust causes such as these.

Is there anyone on here that is in Canberra that can make it to the senimar?

[Aidan3]

I must be missing something huge here. If the guy is writing books about training animals and bringing people who work with animals into lectures - then how on earth is anyone drawing the conclusion that he will be advocating that animals should not be trained? Oil - water.

Erny's concerns might be valid, I would like to know more about any political views he may have.

Maybe the RSPCA are just interested in getting dogs out of the backyard and down to the dog club, or effectively under control so they can be taken to the park? God knows there are thousands upon thousands locked in the back-yard or deemed untrainable because the owner didn't know how to motivate them.

[Erny]

Hi Aidan

Remember that it is an RSPCA Science Seminar. Paul is only chairing it.

If the RSPCA was only trying to target the average pet owner as a way of getting them to get out and be active with their dogs, I'm fairly certain they wouldn't be heading this under the name of "science".

This could be a good seminar with only good intent (and not with any other RSPCA control favoured agenda behind it). But if I were going (wish I could) I'd be going on alert to the potential for an underlying agenda. If that "alert" proves unnecessary, then well and good. Remember that RSPCA has a history that has lead to the cynicism it receives.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Erny

[Tassie]

...and do any of them actually enjoy it? ...

I'll be interested in seeing them develop a 'scientific' way of working this out??

[shortstep]

$160.00 to attend. I do not donate to the RSPCA and certainly not that amount of money. I could and would attend if it was free, being offered by the RSPCA to help the dog community. But that is not the case, it appears to be a money maker and special interest group serving.

Edited September 28, 2010 by shortstep

[Aidan]

...and do any of them actually enjoy it? ...

I'll be interested in seeing them develop a 'scientific' way of working this out??

There are confounders, but determining (with statistical significance) whether an animal is experiencing enjoyment or not is not hard. My guess is that it might be the sort of thing they discuss in the seminar?

At the most basic level, if the animal repeats something then there was a reinforcing consequence. So we can guess that if they sit, we toss a ball, then they come back and sit in front of you again, maybe they enjoyed chasing the ball? There are other behavioural measures, biological measures including biochemical markers (good indicator of enduring happiness or lack of stress), and we can even look at which part of the brain is most active.

If we take a really critical look at all these measures, we have strong evidence that aversion can be used without diminishing "enjoyment" (or causing distress). So any scientific review of whether animals enjoy training or not would not necessarily support some of the claims that the RSPCA has made in the past.

[Tassie]

Thanks Aidan - I was partly tongue in cheek - but of course, you could measure some of the brain chemistry - though whether the animals would 'enjoy' that is also an interesting question.

I remember hearing a talk from Peta Clarke about the eye openers of training free flight birds - who could just fly off if they weren't 'enjoying' their training.

[Erny]

Well, I'd need to see the program and know more details before I'd be able to have any idea whether spending any money on this would be worth the while. The fact that they have found the need to ask these questions and then (I presume) spend time and money on statistically proving the answers is a bit of a concern, IMO.

Is making animals work for our own purposes justified?

How do we motivate animals to perform, or behave the way we want them to, and do any of them actually enjoy it?

Can we use training to improve the welfare of individual animals?

But perhaps when I do understand more of the point of the seminar, I might be convinced to loosen up a little and accept the seminar for what it could be - ie just an information and discussion opportunity. I'd definitely need to find out more as based on what's been written, I can't see the justification of spending $160 and I admit that like Shortstep, I'm somewhat loath to part with any money to the RSPCA.

This question puzzles me though :

And are the training methods used always acceptable, even when they are out of public view?

Edited September 28, 2010 by Erny

[mirawee]

This question puzzles me though :

And are the training methods used always acceptable, even when they are out of public view?

That could be related to horses... there have been massive debates in the horse community internationally about the use of Rollkur and whether it is cause for a cruelty case, particularly in light of video up on Youtube of horses warming up at major competitions with their tongue hanging out looking blue ;) There has been a fair bit of research done into it funded by the FEI - the results of which were a matter of semantics to most people

It would be an interesting talk to go to although price is very steep!

[Staranais]

This question puzzles me though :

And are the training methods used always acceptable, even when they are out of public view?

That could be related to horses... there have been massive debates in the horse community internationally about the use of Rollkur and whether it is cause for a cruelty case, particularly in light of video up on Youtube of horses warming up at major competitions with their tongue hanging out looking blue There has been a fair bit of research done into it funded by the FEI - the results of which were a matter of semantics to most people

It would be an interesting talk to go to although price is very steep!

I was wondering if it was about electric collars, since they seem to be on the SPCA's hit list, and they're used on many working dogs (I've heard of them being used on police, conservation, farm & SAR dogs for various applications).

Aren't we all a suspicious lot. ;) The lecturer himself looks like a reasonable guy & an interesting speaker, from the link Aidan posted.